CONTENTS 3. DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 3-2 3.1 SITE LOCALITY 3 2 3.2 BIOPHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 3 3 3.2.1 Climate 3 3 3.2.2 Landscape 3 3 3.2.3 Geology 3 3 3.2.4 Ecology 3 4 3.2.5 Flora and Fauna 3 4 3.2.6 Avifauna 3 4 3.2.7 Bats 3 5 3.2.8 Heritage 3 5 3.3 SOCIO ECONOMIC 3 5 3.3.1 Demographics 3 5 3.3.2 Employment 3 6 3.3.3 Income levels 3 8 3.3.4 Economic growth and development 3 8 3.4 PLANNING CONTEXT AND SURROUNDING LAND USES 3 9 Figure 3.1: Melkhoutbosch substation, near the N2-R330 interchange north of Humansdorp 3-2 Figure 3.2: Gentle slopes on which the proposed turbines will be constructed 3-3 Figure 3.2: Jobs per sector for the Kouga Municipality 3-7 Figure 3.3: Locality map showing land parcels included in the wind project 3-10 Table 3.1: Population numbers in the wider study area (2001) 3-6 Table 3.2: Unemployment in the wider study area (2001) 3-6 Table 3.3: Employment per industry in the wider study area (2001) 3-7 Table 3.4: Household incomes in the wider study area (2001) 3-8 pg 3-1
3. DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT This chapter provides an overview of the affected environment and local planning context (including surrounding land uses) for the Jeffrey s Bay Wind Project. A broad understanding is given to the term environment, which includes the biophysical, socio-economic and heritage environment. This chapter, therefore, is intended to assist the reader in identifying potential impacts on the environment (positive or negative) and opportunities or constraints which the affected environment may present for the development. 3.1 SITE LOCALITY The project is located in the Kouga Municipality which is located in the District Municipality of Cacadu. The facility will be situated on the coastal plateau inland of the towns of Humansdorp and Jeffrey s Bay, at an elevation of approximately 160 m to 220 m above sea level. The facility will cover several farms, the majority of which are located immediately inland of the N2 highway. The facility will be accessed along three to four of six possible gravel access roads that will be upgraded, if it is an existing road, or otherwise constructed for the development. These three access points will be to access the project during construction and operation. While the fourth access route may only be utilised during construction. In terms of proximity to residential areas, the eastern most point of the study area is approximately 5 km north-west from the closest inhabited residential area of Wavecrest, at Jeffrey s Bay (refer to Figure 1.1). Figure 3.1: Melkhoutbosch substation, near the N2-R330 interchange north of Humansdorp pg 3-2
3.2 BIOPHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 3.2.1 Climate The Kouga region has a bimodal rainfall pattern, where the summer and winter rainfall regions come together, typical of the south-east coastal region of the country. The mean annual rainfall is approximately 400 mm. The weather is mild without extreme conditions with average summer temperatures of 24 C and winter temperatures of 17 C. During winter the prevailing wind is a westerly to south westerly and during summer the wind is predominantly easterly. Wind occurs on a nearly daily basis in the area. 3.2.2 Landscape 3.2.3 Geology The landscape is dominated by the surrounding agricultural land and, on the south eastern site, the town of Jeffrey s Bay is situated. Several power lines cross the site, including the 66 kv municipal power line to Jeffrey s Bay, distribution lines to some of the farm dwellings and a 132 kv Eskom power line running in an east-west direction parallel to and north of the N2 highway, with the Melkhoutbosch substation (Figure 3.1) located on this power line north of the N2-R330 highway interchange. The proposed wind farm site is situated on an area dominated by resistant Table Mountain Group quartzite with the incision of the Swart River to the south and southwest. The soil is often shallow on the hills and therefore not suitable for crop farming. Boreholes in the vicinity of the site indicate that the water table at the site is about 50 to 55m below the surface. Coastal towns adjacent to the site include Jeffrey s Bay, Ashton Bay and Paradise Beach. Humansdorp lies to the west of the site. Northeast of the site the landscape drops gradually beyond the N2 towards the Kabeljous River. Towards the west and northwest, beyond the Swart River, the land rises towards the foothills of the Cape Fold Mountains. North, beyond the Kabeljous River, the land initially drops down into the Gamtoos River valley, but then rises steeply into the Baviaanskloof mountains. The proposed site provides views of the coast from St Francis Bay to the Gamtoos River mouth. Figure 3.2: Gentle slopes on which the proposed turbines will be constructed pg 3-3
3.2.4 Ecology The habitat is dominated by grazed grassy fynbos, or pastures containing fynbos elements that structurally resemble natural grassland. These areas of old farmland are now overgrown with grass and used for grazing, with dams and thicket in the kloofs and drainage lines. A small percentage of the land consists of cultivated fields, mainly producing fodder for livestock. A couple of farm dams are present on the site and temporary wetlands occur in the rainy season on the flat areas in the rainy season, especially towards the northern part of the site. Ecological barriers in the area consist consist of fences, gravel farm roads, culverts and power lines. Utility lines and roads form corridors for bird mediated seed dispersal as well as vehicle mediated dispersal, in the case of roads. Several alien plant species were spotted, as well as two CARA Category 2 species, Acacia cyclops and Acacia mearnsii. 3.2.5 Flora and Fauna The present vegetation consists of: Gamtoos Thicket, restricted to kloofs and valleys along drainage lines, of which the latter are dominated by trees. Kouga Grassy Sandstone Fynbos which includes communities of distinct rocky outcrops on ridges with fynbos/thicket, shrubby fynbos and low-lying seep and wetlands areas dominated by grasses and herbs. Dams with typical aquatic and riparian flora. 3.2.6 Avifauna The Conservation Status (Pierce, 2002) of the vegetation types ranges from Least Concern/Vulnerable (Gamtoos Thicket) to Least Concern (Kouga Grassy Sandstone Fynbos). Faunal species that occur in the study area were mostly assigned a conservation status of Least Concern, except Hewitt s Ghost Frog (Heleophryne hewitti), which is regarded as Critically Endangered (Branch, 1988). The species is only known to be present within a limited number of catchments within the Elandsberg mountains, and as expected, no individuals of this species were found at the proposed site. The site does not host any butterfly of special concern and does not fall within an area of any reptile distribution as presented in Branch (1988). The Vulnerable Blue Duiker (Philantomba monticola) and endangered Oribi (Ourebia ourebi) have distributions that overlap with the locations of the wind farm. Due to the nature and present condition of the habitat, these species are not expected to occur on the proposed site. However, since the actual status of these two species has not been determined, their possible presence has not been ruled out. The species that are most likely to be adversely affected are raptors that use the favourable wind conditions on the ridges to forage. The site also contains highly suitable habitat for Denham s Bustard (vulnerable). Blue Crane (vulnerable and near-endemic), Secretary Bird (nearthreatened), White-bellied Korhaan (vulnerable), Black Harrier (near-threatened, White Stork (Palaearctic migrant) and Jackal Buzzard (endemic) also appear in the area. Reports in the literature indicate that Blue Cranes and White Storks are not usually affected by wind turbine activities (Van Rooyen, 2007). Terrestrial species such as Common Thick-knee, Common Guinea-fowl and Crowned Lapwing also favour the habitat (i.e. degraded Fynbos). The study area contains several dams which attract birds and are therefore sensitive habitat from a bird collision risk perspective. Grassy hillslopes are also high risk area, particularly for raptors. pg 3-4
3.2.7 Bats 3.2.8 Heritage The conservation status of six of the twelve species of bat likely to occur in the area is listed as Near Threatened in Friedman & Daly (2004), while all other species are listed as of Least Concern. There are no large caves on the property and thus breeding roosts will not pose an issue. Species most likely to be affected are the aerial insectivorous bats (e.g. Egyptian Free-tailed Bat) which forage quite high above the ground and are thus at risk of barotrauma from the turning turbine blades. The wind turbines could pose a potential hazard to at least six of the 12 species, on account of their foraging habits. Furthermore some species are known to cover large distances when foraging at night or when moving between winter and summer roosts (e.g. Schreibers Longfingered Bat migrates over 250 km). The wind turbines will also pose a risk to bats whose migration route crosses the potential site, but at present there consist no data regarding migration routes of bats for this area. Due to the fact that the site is further than five kilometers from the coast, shell middens were not expected to be found this far from the beach (Binneman 1996, 2001, 2005). It appears that there was little cultural activity on the site in the past. It is thus unlikely that any valuable archaeological or historical material would be located during development, but sites (possibly shell middens) and material may be exposed after the top soil is removed. 3.3 SOCIO-ECONOMIC According to the Kouga IDP, The Regional settlement pattern in the study area is characterised by various nodes and urban areas that have different functions within the region. Humansdorp, with the highest population concentration in the region, has an established infrastructure and acts as a regional service centre, supplying the surrounding agricultural communities and the coastal towns with commodities and services. Commercial and industrial activities of the region are centred in Humansdorp. The coastal towns of Jeffrey s Bay (which is developing tremendously St Francis Bay, Cape St Francis and Oyster Bay are important and well-established tourist destinations. The urban areas of Hankey and Patensie, situated in the Gamtoos River Valley, provide important services to the surrounding high-density agriculture industry. These two towns are characterised by agricultural related industries (Kouga Municipality, 2007). 3.3.1 Demographics In 2001 the total population in Humansdorp was 15 335 with a further 6 556 people living in adjacent KwaNomzamo making this the largest urban area in the region. Jeffrey s Bay had a smaller population of 14 772 (see Table 3.1). In terms of the racial composition of the inhabitants of these three towns, Humansdorp is predominantly coloured, KwaNomzamo is predominantly black African while Jeffrey s Bay has a relatively similar proportion of coloureds, black Africans and whites. The population of the Kouga Municipality was 70 693 in 2001 while that of the wider Cacadu District was 388 204. More recently the 2007 Community Survey was conducted by Statistics SA. Although the sample size used in this survey is a fraction of that used in the 2001 Census, making estimates far more tentative, it can nevertheless provide indicative estimates worth noting. The 2007 Survey estimated that the total population in Kouga has grown slightly since 2001 to 73 274 and decreased slightly in the Cacadu District to 363 485 (StatsSA, 2008). Estimates in the Kouga IDP argue for a substantially higher population estimate of up to 86 000 people fuelled by a population growth rate of 2,4% per annum between 2000 to 2010 (Kouga Municipality, 2007). pg 3-5
Table 3.1: Population numbers in the wider study area (2001) Cacadu District Kouga Municipality Humansdorp Jeffreys Bay KwaNomzamo Black African 202 541 23 747 879 4 030 6 412 Coloured 140 851 33 619 11 984 4 124 141 Indian or Asian 730 102 36 30 - White 44 082 13 225 2 436 6 588 3 Total 388 204 70 693 15 335 14 772 6 556 Source: StatsSA, 2002 3.3.2 Employment As with the rest of the country, unemployment is a major challenge in the area. Jobless growth remains a feature of the economy and it is likely that the current deterioration in economic conditions will result in further pressure on employment. Based on the 2001 Census figures in Table 3.2 below, the Kouga Municipality had an unemployment rate of approximately 27% which was similar to the national average at the time. However, KwaNomzamo (43% unemployed), Humansdorp (29% unemployed) and the Cacadu District (35% unemployed) all had higher unemployment rates by comparison indicating an above-average level of need for employment. More recent estimates from the 2007 Community Survey indicate that unemployment remains a major challenge in the Kouga Municipality and has stayed at 27% for 2007 (StatsSA, 2008). More recent unemployment statistics for the individual towns in the municipal area are unfortunately not available. Table 3.2: Unemployment in the wider study area (2001) Cacadu District Kouga Municipality Humansdorp Jeffreys Bay KwaNomzamo Employed 94 975 20 143 4 043 4 497 1 674 Unemployed 52 030 7 289 1 671 1 793 1 275 % unemployed 35.4% 26.6% 29.2% 28.5% 43.2% Source: StatsSA, 2002 For the Cacadu and Kouga Municipal area, the dominant sector in terms of employment provision is the agriculture, forestry and fishing sector providing 36% for Cacadu and 33% for Kouga of all employment opportunities in these areas (see Table 3.3 below). Other important sectors in the Kouga Municipality include wholesale and retail trade (15% of employment) and community/social/personal services (14% of employment). By comparison with the wider Kouga municipal area, Humansdorp and Jeffrey s Bay have a particularly high proportion of workers in the wholesale and retail trade as well as construction sectors reflecting their status as service centres with relatively high levels of construction at the time. In KwaNomzamo, by contrast, far higher levels of employment are associated with the agriculture, forestry and fishing (24% of employment) reflecting a high concentration of lower skilled jobs among its residents. pg 3-6
Table 3.3: Employment per industry in the wider study area (2001) Cacadu District Kouga Municipality Humansdorp Jeffreys Bay KwaNomzamo Agric, hunting; forestry & fishing 36% 33% 6% 7% 24% Mining and quarrying 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Manufacturing 5% 7% 7% 10% 10% Electricity; gas and water supply 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% Construction 6% 11% 23% 14% 11% Wholesale and retail trade 13% 15% 24% 21% 14% Transport; storage and comms 2% 2% 3% 2% 2% Finl, insure, real est. & business serv. 4% 6% 8% 11% 5% Community, social and personal serv. 18% 14% 18% 19% 18% Other and not adequately defined 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Private Households 14% 11% 10% 16% 16% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Source: StatsSA, 2002 Figure 3.2 below shows that the number of jobs in the Kouga Municipality increased by the greatest degree in the construction sector between 1996 and 2001 reflecting rapid development of the area. The agriculture, forestry and fisheries sectors shed the greatest number of jobs during the same period in keeping with trends such as increased mechanisation of workforce. Figure 3.2: Jobs per sector for the Kouga Municipality (1996 dark bars, 2001 lighter bars) Source: Demarcation Board using Census 1996 & 2001 pg 3-7
3.3.3 Income levels Household income levels in the study area are shown in Table 3.4. Approximately 44% of households in the Cacadu District and 33% in the Kouga municipal area had incomes below R9,600 per year in 2001. KwaNomzamo had a similar income pattern to the District (46% of households with incomes below R9,600 per year) while Jeffrey s Bay and Humansdorp fared substantially better than the District and slightly better than the wider Kouga municipal area. Table 3.4: Household incomes in the wider study area (2001) Cacadu District Kouga Municipality Humansdorp Jeffreys Bay KwaNomzamo No income 14% 11% 9% 10% 17% R1 - R4 800 7% 5% 3% 3% 8% R4 801 - R9 600 23% 17% 13% 13% 21% R9 601 - R19 200 23% 24% 20% 17% 29% R19 201 - R38 400 15% 19% 26% 17% 18% R38 401 - R76 800 8% 12% 15% 18% 5% R76 801 - R153 600 5% 8% 9% 14% 1% R153 601 - R307 200 2% 3% 4% 6% 0% R307 201 - R614 400 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% R614 401 - R1 228 800 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% R1 228 801 - R2 457 600 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% R2 457 601 and more 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Source: StatsSA, 2002 The 2007 Kouga IDP notes that the proportion of household living in poverty has increased by 6.4% in the past 10 years from 26.6% to 32.9%. The rate of increase in the Eastern Cape Province and Cacadu District ranges between 9% and 10% over the same period. Encouragingly the Human Development Index (HDI) for the Kouga area has improved in the past 10 years from 0.57 in 1996 to 0.62 in 2005 and remains better than the provincial and District HDI (Kouga Municipality, 2007). 3.3.4 Economic growth and development Economic development faces many challenges in the Kouga municipal area although its performance relative to other areas in the Cacadu District and Eastern Cape is encouraging. The Kouga IDP point out that municipal productivity is higher than the averages for the Cacadu District and province principally due to high growth in value creation relative to employment and labour remuneration. Growth in GDP (Gross Domestic Product) 1 and employment, from 1996 to 2004, and skills available to the local economy, are both higher than the Provincial average. Kouga also has among the highest Formal Economy Performance scores in the province, with positive factors including the positive trade balance, a fairly diversified economy, low financial grant dependence, and strong GDP and employment growth performance. The Municipality fares well on Economic 1 A measure of an area s overall economic output. It is the market value of all final goods and services made within the borders of an area in a year. pg 3-8
Absorption Capacity 2, considering high total disposable income, employment multiplier and informal sector capacity to generate economic opportunities relative to formal employment. The local economy claims a comparative advantage, for both employment and GDP contribution, in agriculture (centred on agriculture and hunting at 9.87% GVA and 27.99% employment) and construction (6.18% GVA 3 and 10.42% employment). Kouga also claims GVA advantages in utilities (electricity supply, 1.82%, and water, 1.45%), trade (centred on retail trade at 9.03%) and community services (dominated by public administration at 6.69%). Leading products of the local economy include hunting and tourism, deciduous fruit and dairy products. The Municipality is home to a string of popular coastal tourist destinations from Jeffrey s Bay to Cape St Francis, and offers a wide range of activities and products including historical and heritage sites, the Kouga Cultural Centre, surfing, fishing, hiking, biking and sandboarding, birding and game viewing, and various other outdoor and adventure activities (Kouga Municipality, 2007). Tourism in the region is thus predominantly linked to the natural environment. 3.4 PLANNING CONTEXT AND SURROUNDING LAND USES Figure 3.3 provides an overview of properties adjacent to the Jeffrey s Bay wind power facility. The area s most important economic activity is dairy farming, and pastures have replaced indigenous Fynbos in many areas. Activities on the land surrounding the wind farm site include: Stock farming Crop farming and Untransformed land (natural vegetation). The farms included in the proposed wind farm are mostly used for extensive grazing of livestock, in particular grazing for cattle; with some broiler chickens and game farming also present (e.g. Impala Ranch). The properties are currently zoned agricultural and rezoning is not required for the purpose of the wind development. When the wind farm is established, the actual physical footprint of the turbine and foundation is limited and grazing can continue beneath the turbines. Initial communication from the Kouga Local Municipality indicates that it is therefore not necessary for the area of the wind farm to be rezoned. 2 Extent to which a state, in this case a region, is able to fully spend the allocated financial resources 3 Gross value added: The value of goods and services produced in an area, industry or sector of an economy. pg 3-9
Figure 3.3: Locality map showing land parcels included in the wind project pg 3-10